Avid flyer

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

I have an opportunity to buy an Avid Flyer at a very atrative price.
There seem some drawbacks, though, and I'll be glad to learn how to
weigh them.

-) It is 17 year old and has not flown for 5 years. Seller claims it
spent those 5 years in a dry hangar, though. But I have my concerns
about corrosion on the frame, plus about having to redo the covering.
-) The engine is a Rotax 912UL, i.e. the basic 4-stroke Rotax, 80 hp.
Somewhere I heard that older Rotaxes have a lower TBO than the recent
ones, if so how to make sure? And what measures ought to have been taken
before storing for 5 years? How to test if the long hibernation was well
survived?
-) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?
-) I hear rumours that even if all taildraggers are nasty suckers, the
Kitfox and its relatives are particularly nasty - and they're all
descended from the Avid Flyer. Any comments?

Thanks in advance,
KA

[Pete Christensen]

Don't know about Avid specifically but more than a year ago I bought a
Kitfox III that is 17 years old and sat quite a bit over the years and also
has a 912 engine. The original GCS prop was trash and had to be replaced.
Other than that I have put on 150 hours with only normal maintenance. As
for 912 TBO yes it was shorter but I believe if you do all the updates it
will equal or exceed TBO. Now I have never flown an Avid but my Kitfox is
NOT any harder than most Taildraggers. Can't speak for other Kitfoxes but
whoever said "Kitfox and its relatives are particularly nasty" is a girlyman
and should turn in his pilot's license.

Pete


"jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
...
>I have an opportunity to buy an Avid Flyer at a very atrative price. There
>seem some drawbacks, though, and I'll be glad to learn how to weigh them.
>
> -) It is 17 year old and has not flown for 5 years. Seller claims it spent
> those 5 years in a dry hangar, though. But I have my concerns about
> corrosion on the frame, plus about having to redo the covering.
> -) The engine is a Rotax 912UL, i.e. the basic 4-stroke Rotax, 80 hp.
> Somewhere I heard that older Rotaxes have a lower TBO than the recent
> ones, if so how to make sure? And what measures ought to have been taken
> before storing for 5 years? How to test if the long hibernation was well
> survived?
> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my training
> on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to tricycle? If
> so, how much of an effort does it take?
> -) I hear rumours that even if all taildraggers are nasty suckers, the
> Kitfox and its relatives are particularly nasty - and they're all
> descended from the Avid Flyer. Any comments?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> KA
>

[Peter Dohm]

Much more likely, whoever said it (about most types) happened to fly an
example with the main undercarriage missalligned. Have a mechanic check it
who is familiar with tail wheel aircraft.

Peter


"Pete Christensen" > wrote in message
m...
> Don't know about Avid specifically but more than a year ago I bought a
> Kitfox III that is 17 years old and sat quite a bit over the years and
> also
> has a 912 engine. The original GCS prop was trash and had to be replaced.
> Other than that I have put on 150 hours with only normal maintenance. As
> for 912 TBO yes it was shorter but I believe if you do all the updates it
> will equal or exceed TBO. Now I have never flown an Avid but my Kitfox is
> NOT any harder than most Taildraggers. Can't speak for other Kitfoxes but
> whoever said "Kitfox and its relatives are particularly nasty" is a
> girlyman
> and should turn in his pilot's license.
>
> Pete
>
>
> "jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I have an opportunity to buy an Avid Flyer at a very atrative price. There
>>seem some drawbacks, though, and I'll be glad to learn how to weigh them.
>>
>> -) It is 17 year old and has not flown for 5 years. Seller claims it
>> spent those 5 years in a dry hangar, though. But I have my concerns about
>> corrosion on the frame, plus about having to redo the covering.
>> -) The engine is a Rotax 912UL, i.e. the basic 4-stroke Rotax, 80 hp.
>> Somewhere I heard that older Rotaxes have a lower TBO than the recent
>> ones, if so how to make sure? And what measures ought to have been taken
>> before storing for 5 years? How to test if the long hibernation was well
>> survived?
>> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
>> training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
>> tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?
>> -) I hear rumours that even if all taildraggers are nasty suckers, the
>> Kitfox and its relatives are particularly nasty - and they're all
>> descended from the Avid Flyer. Any comments?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> KA
>>
>
>

[cavelamb[_2_]]

Peter Dohm wrote:
> Much more likely, whoever said it (about most types) happened to fly an
> example with the main undercarriage missalligned. Have a mechanic check it
> who is familiar with tail wheel aircraft.
>
> Peter
>

Or the guy just had two left feet?

[[email protected]]

On Oct 5, 1:05 pm, jan olieslagers >
wrote:
> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
> training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
> tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?

I bet it would probably cost as much money and time to convert that
airplane to a trike as it would to convert you to a taildragger pilot.
Best thing about becoming a TD pilot is that you will be ably to fly
any subsequent airplane, not just your triked Avid. Isn't that a
better investment?

Dan

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

schreef:
> On Oct 5, 1:05 pm, jan olieslagers >
> wrote:
>> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
>> training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
>> tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?
>
> I bet it would probably cost as much money and time to convert that
> airplane to a trike as it would to convert you to a taildragger pilot.

To make that assumption, one must be able to estimate both factors.
Being a slow learner, I think the effort to make me a taildragger pilot
might be considerable; with the added complication of having to find an
adequate instructor, available when I am, &C

> Best thing about becoming a TD pilot is that you will be ably to fly
> any subsequent airplane, not just your triked Avid. Isn't that a
> better investment?

Acquiring the technique is one thing, keeping it up is another. Your
reasoning applies for someone flying often, and in different planes. Bar
major financial progress, this is not my outlook. And in the long run a
tricycle will be intrinsically safer, I believe, but that's another
discussion.

So allow me to repeat the question: what kind and amount of work would
it take to convert a taildragger Avid Flyer to tricycle?

[cavelamb[_2_]]

jan olieslagers wrote:
> schreef:
>> On Oct 5, 1:05 pm, jan olieslagers >
>> wrote:
>>> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
>>> training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
>>> tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?
>>
>> I bet it would probably cost as much money and time to convert that
>> airplane to a trike as it would to convert you to a taildragger pilot.
>
> To make that assumption, one must be able to estimate both factors.
> Being a slow learner, I think the effort to make me a taildragger pilot
> might be considerable; with the added complication of having to find an
> adequate instructor, available when I am, &C
>
>> Best thing about becoming a TD pilot is that you will be ably to fly
>> any subsequent airplane, not just your triked Avid. Isn't that a
>> better investment?
>
> Acquiring the technique is one thing, keeping it up is another. Your
> reasoning applies for someone flying often, and in different planes. Bar
> major financial progress, this is not my outlook. And in the long run a
> tricycle will be intrinsically safer, I believe, but that's another
> discussion.
>
> So allow me to repeat the question: what kind and amount of work would
> it take to convert a taildragger Avid Flyer to tricycle?


Hogwash! I might buy that in a fast glass taildragger, but an Avid?

LEARN

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

cavelamb schreef:
>
> LEARN

Don't want to be rude, Richard, but I am coming here for answers, not
for orders.

[cavelamb[_2_]]

Apologies offered, jan.

But understand, this is the perfect airplane to learn the art.
If it's set up at all right, they don't come any more docile.

Add the ultra low speed for takeoff and landing, a steerable
tailwheel, and differential braking (I'm happy with heels -
some want to toe dance), it's just doesn't get much better!

So, in my humble opinion, go forth and do it.
You are going to love it!

Richard





jan olieslagers wrote:
> cavelamb schreef:
>>
>> LEARN
>
> Don't want to be rude, Richard, but I am coming here for answers, not
> for orders.

[Anyolmouse]

"jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
...
> schreef:
> > On Oct 5, 1:05 pm, jan olieslagers >
> > wrote:
> >> -) It is a taildragger and I am but a beginner pilot, took all my
> >> training on tricycles. Can a taildragger Avid Flyer be converted to
> >> tricycle? If so, how much of an effort does it take?
> >
> > I bet it would probably cost as much money and time to convert
that
> > airplane to a trike as it would to convert you to a taildragger
pilot.
>
> To make that assumption, one must be able to estimate both factors.
> Being a slow learner, I think the effort to make me a taildragger
pilot
> might be considerable; with the added complication of having to find
an
> adequate instructor, available when I am, &C
>
> > Best thing about becoming a TD pilot is that you will be ably to fly
> > any subsequent airplane, not just your triked Avid. Isn't that a
> > better investment?
>
> Acquiring the technique is one thing, keeping it up is another. Your
> reasoning applies for someone flying often, and in different planes.
Bar
> major financial progress, this is not my outlook. And in the long run
a
> tricycle will be intrinsically safer, I believe, but that's another
> discussion.
>
> So allow me to repeat the question: what kind and amount of work would
> it take to convert a taildragger Avid Flyer to tricycle?

Once your feet get woke up learning to takeoff and land the taildragger
you will not lose the skill. I went for a few years not flying a TD and
had no problem getting back in to one. I think you will find this true
for anyone who has mastered TD's.

--
We have met the enemy and he is us-- Pogo

Anyolmouse

[Stealth Pilot[_3_]]

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 06:02:32 +0000, jan olieslagers
> wrote:


>
>So allow me to repeat the question: what kind and amount of work would
>it take to convert a taildragger Avid Flyer to tricycle?

simple answer ...goes for any taildragger to milkstool conversion.

determin CG position.

cut fuselage apart and move the main gear rearward of the cg and weld
new mounts in position.

either replace the engine mount with one beefed up to support the new
nosewheel
or
cut apart and modify the forward fuselage to take the new nosewheel
mount.

this is probably major surgery on the airframe and will involve a
structural savvy aeronautical engineer to design the mods.

now speaking as a taildragger pilot myself it would be far better if
you polished those stainless steel testicles of yours and went and got
a taildragger endorsement.
you'll never regret mastering the change back to real aeroplanes.
they are lighter, they have less drag, and no matter the swagger of
the milkstool pilot you'll be way cooler.(you wont even need raybans
to look cooler)

Stealth Pilot

[Ray Adair]

On 10/7/2009 8:02 AM, Stealth Pilot wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 06:02:32 +0000, jan olieslagers
> > wrote:
>
>
>>
>> So allow me to repeat the question: what kind and amount of work would
>> it take to convert a taildragger Avid Flyer to tricycle?
>
> simple answer ...goes for any taildragger to milkstool conversion.
>
> determin CG position.
>
> cut fuselage apart and move the main gear rearward of the cg and weld
> new mounts in position.
>
> either replace the engine mount with one beefed up to support the new
> nosewheel
> or
> cut apart and modify the forward fuselage to take the new nosewheel
> mount.
>
> this is probably major surgery on the airframe and will involve a
> structural savvy aeronautical engineer to design the mods.
>
> now speaking as a taildragger pilot myself it would be far better if
> you polished those stainless steel testicles of yours and went and got
> a taildragger endorsement.
> you'll never regret mastering the change back to real aeroplanes.
> they are lighter, they have less drag, and no matter the swagger of
> the milkstool pilot you'll be way cooler.(you wont even need raybans
> to look cooler)
>
> Stealth Pilot

and much safer in and out of rough field, IMO.

[Tom De Moor]

In article >,
says...
>
> now speaking as a taildragger pilot myself it would be far better if
> you polished those stainless steel testicles of yours and went and got
> a taildragger endorsement.


But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...

Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in my
eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow TD-flying
when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.

No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about 15
days a year.


> you'll never regret mastering the change back to real aeroplanes.
> they are lighter, they have less drag, and no matter the swagger of
> the milkstool pilot you'll be way cooler.(you wont even need raybans
> to look cooler)
>

Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no 'coolness'-
factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle. Sadly
they do that for a valid reason.

As for stainless balls: no need for them in a plane. Sounds bad for
weight and balance.

Just my 2 (euro-)cents,

Tom De Moor (as Jan living near Brussels, Belgium)

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

Tom De Moor schreef:

> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in my
> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow TD-flying
> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.

In this respect I know better: two of my instructors are experienced
PPL-taildragger pilots, both making beautiful 3-point landings occasionally.

Mind you, they are my instructors on Belgium ultralight (2-seater, 450
kg max gross) which is more like a US-an LSA, and fits the Avid Flyer
neatly.

As for the endorsement: perhaps it doesn't exist legally, I don't doubt
you are right. But no club will let me fly its taildraggers without
proper training, and neither will I risk my own - if ever I buy this
Flyer, at the moment I don't think so.

De groeten, Tom!

[[email protected]]

On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Tom De Moor >
wrote:

> But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...
>
> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in my
> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow TD-flying
> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.
>
> No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about 15
> days a year.

> Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no 'coolness'-
> factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle. Sadly
> they do that for a valid reason.

There's no tailwheel endorsement in Canada, either. And we pay no more
for insurance on a taildragger than a trike. The taildragger's dragon-
breath is way overestimated. We train all of our students on the
Citabria, including teenage girls and a few folks who have some
trouble learning. They all get it. And the Citabria (7ECA) is going to
be way more squirrelly than an Avid, with its touchdown speed of over
50 mph. They demonstrate 10 kt crosswind landings and TOs before they
solo. I've done 15-20 kt xwinds in these. They will teach you how to
*actually* fly, something rather handy.

Dan

[Peter Dohm]

> wrote in message
...
> On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Tom De Moor >
> wrote:
>
>> But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...
>>
>> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in my
>> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow TD-flying
>> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.
>>
>> No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about 15
>> days a year.
>
>> Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no 'coolness'-
>> factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle. Sadly
>> they do that for a valid reason.
>
> There's no tailwheel endorsement in Canada, either. And we pay no more
> for insurance on a taildragger than a trike. The taildragger's dragon-
> breath is way overestimated. We train all of our students on the
> Citabria, including teenage girls and a few folks who have some
> trouble learning. They all get it. And the Citabria (7ECA) is going to
> be way more squirrelly than an Avid, with its touchdown speed of over
> 50 mph. They demonstrate 10 kt crosswind landings and TOs before they
> solo. I've done 15-20 kt xwinds in these. They will teach you how to
> *actually* fly, something rather handy.
>
> Dan
>
Just curious, Dan,

Do you accomplish the ab initio training on grass or on pavement?

I have yet to fly a tailwheeler, but I have heard that the grass is much
more forgiving--and that fits with everything I know about physics.

Peter

[Anyolmouse]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message
>
...
> > On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Tom De Moor >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...
> >>
> >> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in
my
> >> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow
TD-flying
> >> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.
> >>
> >> No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about
15
> >> days a year.
> >
> >> Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no
'coolness'-
> >> factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle.
Sadly
> >> they do that for a valid reason.
> >
> > There's no tailwheel endorsement in Canada, either. And we pay no
more
> > for insurance on a taildragger than a trike. The taildragger's
dragon-
> > breath is way overestimated. We train all of our students on the
> > Citabria, including teenage girls and a few folks who have some
> > trouble learning. They all get it. And the Citabria (7ECA) is going
to
> > be way more squirrelly than an Avid, with its touchdown speed of
over
> > 50 mph. They demonstrate 10 kt crosswind landings and TOs before
they
> > solo. I've done 15-20 kt xwinds in these. They will teach you how to
> > *actually* fly, something rather handy.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> Just curious, Dan,
>
> Do you accomplish the ab initio training on grass or on pavement?
>
> I have yet to fly a tailwheeler, but I have heard that the grass is
much
> more forgiving--and that fits with everything I know about physics.
>
> Peter

Letting some air out of the tires helps too. At least this is what a
fellow instructor did on his 8A Luscombe.

--
A man is known by the company he keeps- Unknown

Anyolmouse

[[email protected]]

On Oct 7, 3:56 pm, "Peter Dohm" > wrote:

> Just curious, Dan,
>
> Do you accomplish the ab initio training on grass or on pavement?
>
> I have yet to fly a tailwheeler, but I have heard that the grass is much
> more forgiving--and that fits with everything I know about physics.
>
> Peter

On pavement, and then some on the grass if it isn't deep in snow like
we get here sometimes. The pavement isn't a big deal if you get the
alignment right, and it'll sure tell you if you're off a bit. One
thing you really DO want: a good, experienced instructor who will keep
you out of trouble. I used to spend some time early on just getting
the student to accelerate to a speed short of takeoff, then pull the
throttle back and let him figure out how to keep it straight. Once he
understands the idea that he has to anticipate the swerve and could
keep it straight, then I'd start shoving the rudder pedals around to
make it swerve and get him to fix it. Lotsa fun. ANd he learned soon
that you used ALL the controls, not just the pedals; aileron and
elevator also come into play on the ground, too. Taildraggers are
flown until they're tied down.

Typical first solo in a 172 will come at around 10-15 hours. Then that
student, once licensed, will have to spend maybe 7-10 hours in the
Citabria to get the taildragger solo. The student who starts from
scratch in the Citabria (and we do a few) will solo it in the same
10-15 hours as the trike student did. There is really no magic to it,
no steel-ball guts required, no special intelligence or ability
needed. But *please* don't tell my trike-only buddies that. Might hurt
my macho reputation:-)

Dan

[Oliver Arend]

> In this respect I know better: two of my instructors are experienced
> PPL-taildragger pilots, both making beautiful 3-point landings occasionally.

I just recently went on a flight with our test pilot on an Fk 14
Polaris that had a tailwheel. I got to land the thing and it was no
problem at all, I just barely realized I was in a taildragger. But
this probably differs from one plane to the other.

Oliver

[Stealth Pilot[_3_]]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:06:39 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:


>Citabria to get the taildragger solo. The student who starts from
>scratch in the Citabria (and we do a few) will solo it in the same
>10-15 hours as the trike student did. There is really no magic to it,
>no steel-ball guts required, no special intelligence or ability
>needed. But *please* don't tell my trike-only buddies that. Might hurt
>my macho reputation:-)
>
>Dan

that is one of aviations big jokes. there is no magic about it at all,
just the application of technique based on theory.

my Tailwind gets flown in windsock horizontal conditions when needed.
it isnt fun and can be hard work but it is doable.

the sad thing in aviation is that the shiny arsed office dwelling
regulators and the timid of heart all put up barriers to flight that
are totally unnecessary.

there is a technology and a technique to it and once mastered it is
easy.

if it were local to me and the price was right I'd buy Karel's avid in
a flash.

Stealth Pilot

[Tri-Pacer[_4_]]

I soloed in the 50's as a 16 year old kid. I was turned loose with a
conventional gear plane with 8 hours and 20 minutes of dual. It can't be too
hard--I managed it. :-)

Going through my old log books I see very few references to wind or gusty
conditions.
So I guess all the todo today about "taildraggers" has to do with
un-learning all the sloppy habits that tricycle landing gear instills.

Sadly I can't afford a Pacer and had to settle for a Tri-Pacer. Insurance
woud have been double and this OF needs all the bucks for the gas tank. :-)

As a result there are many rough strips that I won't venture into.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1
Indian Hills Airpark, AZ

[[email protected]]

On Oct 8, 9:39 am, "Tri-Pacer" > wrote:

> So I guess all the todo today about "taildraggers" has to do with
> un-learning all the sloppy habits that tricycle landing gear instills.

Oh, boy, is that ever true. It's become too easy.

Dan

[Scott[_7_]]

Tri-Pacer wrote:
> I soloed in the 50's as a 16 year old kid. I was turned loose with a
> conventional gear plane with 8 hours and 20 minutes of dual. It can't be too
> hard--I managed it. :-)
>
> Going through my old log books I see very few references to wind or gusty
> conditions.
> So I guess all the todo today about "taildraggers" has to do with
> un-learning all the sloppy habits that tricycle landing gear instills.
>
> Sadly I can't afford a Pacer and had to settle for a Tri-Pacer. Insurance
> woud have been double and this OF needs all the bucks for the gas tank. :-)
>
> As a result there are many rough strips that I won't venture into.
>
> Cheers:
>
> Paul
> N1431A
> 2AZ1
> Indian Hills Airpark, AZ
>
>

Convert the Tri-Pacer to a Pacer. Lots of people have. :)

[Peter Dohm]

"Anyolmouse" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
> ...
>> > wrote in message
>>
> ...
>> > On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Tom De Moor >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...
>> >>
>> >> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in
> my
>> >> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow
> TD-flying
>> >> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.
>> >>
>> >> No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about
> 15
>> >> days a year.
>> >
>> >> Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no
> 'coolness'-
>> >> factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle.
> Sadly
>> >> they do that for a valid reason.
>> >
>> > There's no tailwheel endorsement in Canada, either. And we pay no
> more
>> > for insurance on a taildragger than a trike. The taildragger's
> dragon-
>> > breath is way overestimated. We train all of our students on the
>> > Citabria, including teenage girls and a few folks who have some
>> > trouble learning. They all get it. And the Citabria (7ECA) is going
> to
>> > be way more squirrelly than an Avid, with its touchdown speed of
> over
>> > 50 mph. They demonstrate 10 kt crosswind landings and TOs before
> they
>> > solo. I've done 15-20 kt xwinds in these. They will teach you how to
>> > *actually* fly, something rather handy.
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> Just curious, Dan,
>>
>> Do you accomplish the ab initio training on grass or on pavement?
>>
>> I have yet to fly a tailwheeler, but I have heard that the grass is
> much
>> more forgiving--and that fits with everything I know about physics.
>>
>> Peter
>
> Letting some air out of the tires helps too. At least this is what a
> fellow instructor did on his 8A Luscombe.
>
> --
> A man is known by the company he keeps- Unknown
>
> Anyolmouse
>
Actually, letting a litle air out is probably a passable simulation of
grass.

Peter

[jerry wass]

Peter Dohm wrote:
> "Anyolmouse" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> > wrote in message
>>>
>> ...
>>>> On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Tom De Moor >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But, Sir, there is no tailwheel endorsement in Belgium...
>>>>>
>>>>> Nobody who want to teach TD either: I went to France to get the -in
>> my
>>>>> eyes necessary- training and even there they would no allow
>> TD-flying
>>>>> when there was more than 5 knots crosswind-component.
>>>>>
>>>>> No 5 knots cross means that our flying will be restricted to about
>> 15
>>>>> days a year.
>>>>> Nobody argues about the 'cool'-factor but insurances have no
>> 'coolness'-
>>>>> factor: they charge significantly more for a TD than tricycle.
>> Sadly
>>>>> they do that for a valid reason.
>>>> There's no tailwheel endorsement in Canada, either. And we pay no
>> more
>>>> for insurance on a taildragger than a trike. The taildragger's
>> dragon-
>>>> breath is way overestimated. We train all of our students on the
>>>> Citabria, including teenage girls and a few folks who have some
>>>> trouble learning. They all get it. And the Citabria (7ECA) is going
>> to
>>>> be way more squirrelly than an Avid, with its touchdown speed of
>> over
>>>> 50 mph. They demonstrate 10 kt crosswind landings and TOs before
>> they
>>>> solo. I've done 15-20 kt xwinds in these. They will teach you how to
>>>> *actually* fly, something rather handy.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>> Just curious, Dan,
>>>
>>> Do you accomplish the ab initio training on grass or on pavement?
>>>
>>> I have yet to fly a tailwheeler, but I have heard that the grass is
>> much
>>> more forgiving--and that fits with everything I know about physics.
>>>
>>> Peter
>> Letting some air out of the tires helps too. At least this is what a
>> fellow instructor did on his 8A Luscombe.
>>
>> --
>> A man is known by the company he keeps- Unknown
>>
>> Anyolmouse
>>
> Actually, letting a litle air out is probably a passable simulation of
> grass.
>
> Peter
>
> Yeah, but too little air pressure and a side scrub, and you can roll the tire off the rim.
>